Demographics Crunch - Intentionally a Silent Crisis

Not open for further replies.


Do not post hate speech to sciforums.
Not one to elevate Elon Musk to Super Guru status. But he is a 'deep thinker' and certain aspects of his overarching 'futurist vision/warning' is imo very apt:

[YouTube #13khY6SeEe4↱]

Putting aside the very real concern of AI takeover, his dire warning regarding demographics and (imo targeted!) population collapse is for whatever reasons something totally sidelined here at SF.
At the calculated risk of incurring even more warning points for anti******* 'hate speech', I will suggest those with a stiffer spine do a search (NOT using censorship central Google, but preferably, or Gibiru) for 'Kalergi Plan'. Keep going till a site(s) with honesty credentials not PC correctness, stands out. See if a very recognizable pattern doesn't stand out like a sore thumb. Just how the disastrous crash of in particular European or European heritage nations formerly predominant racial profiles has crept in silently over several generations is a story all in itself. But having occurred, certain player are insisting on a 'cure' that in effect amounts to a silent creeping genocide of (traditional) Western society and culture.

For those who would respond such decline in birthrates is a 'natural outcome' of increased prosperity, one only has to look at the very clear (and readily verified as historically true and accurate) statements of intent one will find doing the above suggested search. The glove fits - perfectly. And tragically.
Last edited by a moderator:
Mod Hat — After careful consideration, no
Not one to elevate Elon Musk to Super Guru status. But he is a 'deep thinker' and certain aspects of his overarching 'futurist vision/warning' is imo very apt

So, you give us that prefab setup for Elon Musk pushing Replacement Theory?

Antisemitic fearmongering? A pretense that you are unfairly persecuted for some obscure truth that just happens to sound like the same old white supremacist bullshit? And your argumentative appeal to emotion is nothing new. Having Elon Musk pitch this stuff as a prescription for society to save itself—from him—doesn't really help. Indeed—

This time, it's probably more prudent in my case to just leave it as freedom of choice discovery ride. Few riders expected.

—this is actually long a staple of rightist propaganda, and we have in policy considerations been suckers for this stuff, here, over the years, to the point that you might have overdone it with everything that came after the prefab opening.

The thing is, if discussion "regarding demographics and … population collapse is for whatever reasons something totally sidelined here at SF", it might have something to do with the nature of that discourse: The omitted note about eugenics is not unexpected; the return to antisemitism, conspiracism, juxtaposition against censorship and "PC correctness", discussion of a "disastrous crash" of "formerly predominant racial profiles" described "in particular European or European heritage nations", invocation of "genocide" and "Western Culture", and ultimate appeal to people to just do the prescribed research and see everything just like you do; these are all familiar discursive symbols, both in the world at large and here at Sciforums.

If we look at Musk's appeal to fears about declining birthrates, immigration, and consider that he is making a capitalistic pitch, we find a decision to address reference points found in popular culture regardless of their accuracy, ethic, or implication. This weirdly meshes with his underlying pitch against the unsustainability of sustainability, which in turn requires particular appeals to emotion that very nearly describe traditionalism. Some significant part of the intended worry about labor shortages would tend to ignore the economic realities of the human endeavor; moreover, at some point it gets ridiculous enough that we might wonder whether we really need explicitly humanoid robots to take over the jobs cleaning bathrooms or making french fries—(and the capitalist says yes, because then one unit can be programmed to do both)—so at some point we probably ought to account for the point that this starts with Elon Musk. That need not be a fallacious excuse to discount everything the man says, but, rather, a reminder that he has his own context.

After all, setting aside the point that it is Elon Musk doing his thing, there is still the manner in which you present it. And, really, you hit your marks dead on. It's a classic, typal performance.


We should consider an aspect of these presentations that is not actually sidelined, but, rather, just doesn't come up: One thing I don't see enough of, in general, is transcripts. First and foremost, it's a market thing. But, beyond that, some presentations would be poorly served by transcription, and this ought to stand out. It's a twelve-minute, produced video, why is it not transcribed, and why is that transcription not in easily apparent circulation?

Well, first and foremost, it's a market thing; actually informing people is not the purpose of distributing the video. The purpose is to promote Elon Musk, and also a financial management and consulting firm. The truth of the matter is that the transcript probably wouldn't serve Elon Musk very well. "Elon Musk's Terrifying Speech"? Why is it terrifying? Well, in part because it was calculated to play on certain emotions, and the fact of this thread reflects its success.

To sit down and read through the remarks would create a risk factor, that someone might think Elon Musk is dabbling in dangerous fallacy. It's a volatile risk factor whenever we choose to take Elon Musk seriously. Marketing impressions are intended to cause reactions.

The reaction before us, this heap of familiar conspiracist potsherds, is what it is, but neither is it surprising compared to marketing calculations invoking certain talking points reflective of traditionalistic white supremacism, including labor and migration, and also reproductive duty. What reaction do the marketers expect of who? The topic post, in that context, isn't surprising.
And just to add to what Tiassa wrote:

Moderator note: Q-reeus has been warned (again) for hate speech. This is unacceptable at sciforums and may result in a permanent ban.
Not open for further replies.